The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Directional Patterns of Female Mate Choice and the Role of Sensory Biases
Abstract
A review of the literature reveals that, if females prefer traits that deviate from the population mean, they usually prefer traits of greater quantity. In cases in which the sensory bases of these preferences are identified, females prefer traits of greater quantity because these traits elicit greater sensory stimulation. However, two caveats apply. First, the studies surveyed might not represent an unbiased sample of mate choice, because researchers usually study systems characterized by exaggerated traits. Second, a preference for traits of greater quantity does not suggest that preference for average traits is unimportant; it might be more usual than preference for exaggerated traits. Phylogenetic comparisons sometimes allow one to distinguish among competing hypotheses for the evolution of female mating preferences. Two hypotheses, Fisher's theory of "runaway" sexual selection and the "good genes" hypothesis, predict that traits and preferences coevolve, whereas the "sensory exploitation" hypothesis predicts that males evolve traits to exploit preexisting female biases. Some studies of frogs and fish support the sensory exploitation hypothesis, although this does not exclude the role of other factors in establishing the preexisting bias or in the subsequent elaboration of the preference. It is suggested that studies of mate choice will benefit by a more integrative approach, especially one that combines knowledge of sensory mechanisms with appropriate phylogenetic comparisons.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The genetical theory of natural selection
Fisher, R. A. (1930) · doi:10.5962/bhl.title.27468 · Cited by 17,617
Receptive fields, binocular interaction and functional architecture in the cat’s visual cortex
Hubel, D. H., & Wiesel, T. N. (1962) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1962.sp006837 · Cited by 13,680
Mate selection—A selection for a handicap
Zahavi, A. (1975) · Journal of Theoretical Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-5193(75)90111-3 · Cited by 5,251
Signals, Signal Conditions, and the Direction of Evolution
Endler, J. A. (1992) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285308 · Cited by 1,960
Cited by
Signals, Signal Conditions, and the Direction of Evolution
Endler, J. A. (1992) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/285308 · Cited by 1,960
VARIATION IN MATE CHOICE AND MATING PREFERENCES: A REVIEW OF CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES
JENNIONS, M. D., & PETRIE, M. (1997) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1469-185x.1997.tb00015.x · Cited by 459
Eberhard, W. G., Huber, B. A., S., R. L. R., Briceño, R. D., Salas, I., & Rodriguez, V. (1998) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1998.tb01642.x · Cited by 389
Patterns of advertisement call evolution in toads and chorus frogs
COCROFT, R. B., & RYAN, M. J. (1995) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1006/anbe.1995.0043 · Cited by 359
Self-citationSexual selection and natural selection in bird speciation
Price, T. (1998) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1998.0207 · Cited by 314
Metadata
- Authors
- Ryan, M. J., & Keddy-Hector, A.
- Venue
- The American Naturalist
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1992-03
- Volume
- 139
- Pages
- S4-S35
- ISSN
- 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5323
- OpenAlex
- W2095121014
- Cited by
- 717
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 27.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Directional Patterns of Female Mate Choice and the Role of Sensory Biases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/285303
- The paper
- Ryan, M. J., & Keddy-Hector, A. (1992). Directional Patterns of Female Mate Choice and the Role of Sensory Biases. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/285303
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.